Review of the fish parasitic genus Ceratothoa Dana, 1852 (Crustacea, Isopoda, Cymothoidae) from South Africa, including the description of two new species

(1)

Review of the fish parasitic genus Ceratothoa Dana, 1852... 1

Review of the fish parasitic genus Ceratothoa Dana,

1852 (Crustacea, Isopoda, Cymothoidae) from South

Africa, including the description of two new species

Kerry A. Hadfield1,3,†_{, Niel L. Bruce}2,3,‡_{, Nico J. Smit}3,§

1 Department of Zoology, University of Johannesburg, P.O. Box 524, Auckland Park, 2006 South Africa 2 Museum of Tropical Queensland, Queensland Museum and School of Marine and Tropical Biology, James Cook University; 70–102 Flinders Street, Townsville, Australia 4810 3 Water Research Group (Ecology), Unit for Environmental Sciences and Management, Potchefstroom Campus, North West University, Private Bag X6001, Potchefstroom, 2520, South Africa

† http://zoobank.org/F55EBCB7-CFFE-41C4-AFE8-78BD75341291 ‡ http://zoobank.org/9DA13F3D-AB3A-43E0-BF49-A71EBB8612D7 § http://zoobank.org/9EB3BA08-5E8E-420C-9B3D-F40E308086D8

Corresponding author: Kerry A. Hadfield (kerryh26@yahoo.com)

Academic editor: S. Taiti | Received 19 December 2013 | Accepted 20 March 2014 | Published 10 April 2014

http://zoobank.org/E803925E-0418-463D-863E-183EDDAAA487

Citation: Hadfield KA, Bruce NL, Smit NJ (2014) Review of the fish parasitic genus Ceratothoa Dana, 1852 (Crustacea, Isopoda, Cymothoidae) from South Africa, including the description of two new species. ZooKeys 400: 1–42. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.400.6878

Abstract

The genus Ceratothoa Dana, 1852 is revised for South African waters and re-diagnosed. Ceratothoa retusa (Schioedte & Meinert, 1883) is recorded from the eastern coast, and Ceratothoa africanae sp. n. and

C. famosa sp. n. are described; C. imbricata (Fabricius, 1775) and C. trigonocephala (Leach, 1818), are

redescribed, revised and excluded from the South African fauna. Ceratothoa africanae sp. n. can be distin-guished by the stout body shape of the female; triangular cephalon with a pointed rostrum; short uropods which do not extend past the pleotelson; large carinae on the pereopod basis; a broad pleon; and large medial lobes on female pleopods. Ceratothoa famosa sp. n. is characterised by the long rectangular body shape; pereonite 1 with a raised medial protrusion; narrow antenna with antennule article 1 expanded; uropods which reach the posterior margin of the pleotelson; narrow rami on uropods; and no appendix masculina on pleopod 2 of the male specimens.

ZooKeys 400: 1–42 (2014) doi: 10.3897/zookeys.400.6878 www.zookeys.org

Copyright Kerry A. Hadfield et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0),

which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Launched to accelerate biodiversity research A peer-reviewed open-access journal

(2)

Kerry A. Hadfield et al. / ZooKeys 400: 1–42 (2014) 2

Keywords

Isopod, cymothoid, buccal-cavity, fish parasite, tongue-biter, Indian Ocean

Introduction

Cymothoid isopods are obligate parasites of both freshwater and marine fishes, where they will attach to the external surfaces, gills or inside the buccal-cavity of their fish host (Kensley and Schotte 1989, Trilles 1991). These isopods are economically im-portant parasites as they have been shown to cause detrimental effects on fish in cap-tivity including growth inhibition, malnutrition, anaemia and death in smaller fish (Romestand 1979, Bragoni et al. 1984, Adlard and Lester 1994, Horton and Okamura 2001, Mladineo 2002, Ravi and Rajkumar 2007). One of the most common genera of tongue-biters (cymothoids found inside the buccal-cavity of the fish host, attached to the tongue) in southern Africa is Ceratothoa Dana, 1852.

Very little is known about the cymothoid isopods from southern Africa and the western Indian Ocean (Kensley 1978, 2001). Recently, two buccal attaching genera have been reviewed; Hadfield et al. (2010) revised the monotypic genus Cinusa Schi-oedte & Meinert, 1884, endemic to this region and Hadfield et al. (2013) reviewed Cymothoa Fabricius, 1787 from the southwestern Indian Ocean.

Ceratothoa has long been considered to have three species in South Africa: Cerato-thoa imbricata (Fabricius, 1775), C. retusa (Schioedte & Meinert, 1883) and C. trigo-nocephala (Leach, 1818) (see Kensley 2001). In the present study, none of the material agreed with the descriptions of C. imbricata and C. trigonocephala, and no positive identification for these two species in South Africa could be made. These species are therefore excluded from the South African fauna. However, sampling revealed two new species from the region, leaving the total at three species of Ceratothoa in South Africa.

Methods

Type material for Ceratothoa imbricata and C. trigonocephala were borrowed from the Natural History Museum, UK. All available material from Iziko South African Mu-seum labelled as a Ceratothoa species was borrowed with additional specimens being obtained from fish hosts held in the South African Institute for Aquatic Biodiversity (SAIAB), Grahamstown, South Africa.

New material was collected along the south coast of South Africa by the FRS Africana and from intertidal rock pools at Tsitsikamma National Park.

Isopods were processed according to the techniques described in Hadfield et al. (2010, 2011, 2013). Species descriptions were prepared in DELTA (Descriptive Lan-guage for Taxonomy, see Coleman et al. 2010) using a general Cymothoidae character set. Classification follows Brandt and Poore (2003).

(3)

Review of the fish parasitic genus Ceratothoa Dana, 1852... 3 Synonymies: Those records that we have been unable to confirm directly from specimens or the published figures, or that we otherwise have reasonable doubts about, have been removed from the synonymy.

Abbreviations. BMNH—British Museum, Natural History, UK (now NHMUK);

MNHN—Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris; NHMUK—Natural His-tory Museum, UK; SAIAB—South African Institute for Aquatic Biodiversity, Gra-hamstown; SAM—South African Museum, Cape Town; SMNH—Swedish Museum of Natural History, Stockholm; ZMUC—Zoological Museum, University of Copen-hagen; TL—total length; W—width.

Taxonomy

Family Cymothoidae Leach, 1814 Genus Ceratothoa Dana, 1852 http://species-id.net/wiki/Ceratothoa

Ceratothoa Dana, 1852: 303; Miers 1876: 104–105; Haswell 1882: 282; Schioedte and Meinert 1883: 322–323; Richardson 1905: 233–234; Bowman 1978: 217– 218; Brusca 1981: 177–178; Bruce and Bowman 1989: 1–2; Horton 2000: 1041; Martin et al. 2013: 396.

Codonophilus Haswell, 1881: 471.– 1882: 283; Hale 1926: 201, 223. Rhexana Schioedte & Meinert, 1883: 289–290.

Cteatessa Schioedte & Meinert, 1883: 296–297.

Meinertia Stebbing, 1893: 354.– 1900: 642; 1910a: 103; Richardson 1905: 236–237; Menzies 1962: 116; Schultz 1969: 156.

Rhexanella Stebbing, 1911: 179.

Not Ceratothoa.– Dana 1853: 747; Richardson 1905: 236; Schultz 1969: 155; Kus-sakin 1979: 287 [= Glossobius Schioedte & Meinert, 1883].

Type species. Dana (1852) included two species, Cymothoa gaudichaudii Milne

Ed-wards, 1840 and Cymothoa parallela Otto, 1828 in his new genus without designating a type species (Bowman 1978). Bowman (1978) resolved the generic name, concluding that Ceratothoa had priority over other names that had been in use, but did not desig-nate a type species. The whereabouts of the C. parallela type specimen is unknown, and is thought to no longer be extant (Bruce and Bowman 1989, Horton 2000, Martin et al. 2013). Horton (2000), however, designated a neotype of C. parallela from Oran (but without a redescription) after Schioedte and Meinert (1883) referred to it as a "specim. typ.". The syntype female for C. gaudichaudii is in pieces (the male syntype is still intact) and held at the Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris (Trilles 1973, Hadfield pers. obs.). A type species should ideally be designated only when one or both of the species is fully redescribed and its identity and type material clearly established.

(4)

Diagnosis. Body narrow, strongly vaulted, 2.1–2.9 times as long as wide, widest

at pereonite 5. Cephalon triangular, with blunt rostrum, anterior margin ventrally directed, posterior margin straight. Antennular bases in contact, broad and expand-ed, subequal to antenna. Eyes distinct. Mandible not expanded; mandible palp ar-ticle 2 longer than arar-ticle 3. Maxilla medial lobe partly fused, prominent nodulose spines on each lobe. Maxillule with 4 terminal spines. Maxilliped article 3 with 2 recurved spines, with oostegite lobe. Pereonite 1 anterolateral angles extensions en-compassing cephalon. Pereonites 6 and 7 posterolateral margins not produced. Pere-onite 7 extends past plePere-onite 1. Pleon subequal or narrower than pereon. PlePere-onite 1 width narrower than other pleonites, pleonites 2–5 subequal in width. Pleotelson narrower than pleonites. Coxae 5–7 visible, reniform, often produced and rounded, shorter than somite. Brood pouch from coxae 1–4 and 6, posterior pocket absent. Pereopods 5–7 basis with large blade-like carina, without robust setae. Pereopod 7 slightly larger or more than 1.5 times longer than pereopod 1. Pleopods from dorsal view not visible, decreasing in size posteriorly. Pleopods 1–5 with small pleats or pockets, with proximomedial lamellar lobe (more pronounced in pleopods 3–5), peduncle lobes on the lateral margin absent. Uropod rami short, not extending past posterior margin of pleotelson, subequal.

Remarks. Ceratothoa can best be identified by the triangular cephalon, contiguous

antennular bases, pleonite 1 narrower than the other pleonites, elongate body (2.1–2.9 times as long as wide), and subequal uropod rami which extend to the posterior margin of the pleotelson. Bruce and Bowman (1989) highlighted that Ceratothoa has unique pereopod morphology, with most species having prominent expansions on the basis of the posterior pereopods (pronounced carina), except Ceratothoa gilberti (Richardson, 1904) that has no expansions on any of the pereopods. Furthermore, the ischium of the posterior pereopods is also expanded in some species such as Ceratothoa guttata (Richardson, 1910) (see Bruce and Bowman 1989) and C. carinata (Bianconi, 1869) (see Martin et al. 2013).

The most recent reviews of this genus are those of Bruce and Bowman (1989) and Martin et al. (2013). Meinertia Stebbing, 1893 and Codonophilus Haswell, 1881 were placed into synonymy with Ceratothoa, the senior available name by Bowman (1978), and Bruce and Bowman (1989) synonymised Cteatessa Schioedte & Meinert, 1883 and Rhexanella Stebbing, 1911 with Ceratothoa. Glossobius is distinct from Ceratothoa and is considered a valid genus which includes species associated with pelagic beloni-form fishes (Exocoetidae, Hemirhamphidae).

Relationships. Phylogenetic relationships of the cymothoid genera remain

un-assessed, other than comments given by Brusca (1981), Bruce and Bowman (1989), and the molecular analyses (using small data sets) of Ketmaier et al. (2008) and Jones et al. (2008). Brusca (1981) postulated that there were three evolutionary “lineages” within Cymothoidae based on their attachment sites on the hosts (external surfaces, buccal+gill, and the freshwater flesh burrowing genera). Both Ketmaier et al. (2008) and Jones et al. (2008) later demonstrated that these lineages could not necessarily be upheld.

(5)

Review of the fish parasitic genus Ceratothoa Dana, 1852... 5 In a preliminary phylogenetic analysis using 23 cymothoid genera, with Rocinela Leach, 1818 (Aegidae) as the outgroup (Hadfield 2012), the buccal-cavity isopods grouped together in a clade based on these genera having a cephalon encompassed by the anterolateral margins of pereonite 1, pereopods 5–7 with a large blade-like carina on the basis, and a partly fused maxilla medial lobe (with the exception of Glossobius which has lobed anterolateral margins and a distinct maxilla mesial lobe and Lobotho-rax Bleeker, 1857 which has no carina on the basis).

Ceratothoa is most closely related to Glossobius and this was shown in the prelimi-nary study where the two genera grouped as sister taxa (Hadfield 2012). These genera share many similar characteristics such as the antennular bases being in contact (the apomorphic character for this clade); expanded antennules; antennules subequal to antennae; maxilliped article 3 with 2 recurved spines; and no peduncle lobes on the pleopods. Ceratothoa is distinguished from Glossobius by having distinct eyes; maxilla medial lobe partly fused rather than distinct; maxilliped with only one oostegite lobe compared to the two in Glossobius; anterolateral margins of pereonite 1 extended (not lobed as in Glossobius); and uropod rami are subequal.

Ceratothoa retusa (Schioedte & Meinert, 1883)

http://species-id.net/wiki/Ceratothoa_retusa

Ceratothoæ retusæ Schioedte & Meinert in Hilgendorf 1879: 847 [nomen nudum]. Cteatessa retusa.– Schioedte & Meinert, 1883: 297–299, tab. XI (Cym. XVIII) Figs 11–13;

Stebbing 1908: 424; Barnard 1925: 393.– 1940: 491; Nierstrasz 1931: 131; Trilles 1986: 625, tab. 1; 1994: 130; 2008: 23; Kensley 1978: 79–80, Figs 32 (g–h).

Codonophilus hemiramphi Pillai, 1954: 14–15 [nomen dubium]. Ceratothoa hemiramphi.– Trilles 1994: 120; Kensley 2001: 232.

Ceratothoa retusa.– Bruce and Bowman 1989: 8–12, Figs 5–8; Kensley 2001: 232; Trilles et al. 2011: 446–459; Hadfield et al. in press.

Distribution. Indian Ocean—records from Mozambique, South Africa, Red Sea,

In-dia, Indonesia and northern Australia (see Hadfield et al. in press).

Hosts. Hemirhamphidae buccal-cavity—Hemirhamphus far (Forsskål, 1775) and

H. robustus Günther, 1866 (see Hadfield et al. in press).

Remarks. Ceratothoa retusa can be identified by the large pereonite 1 with an

anterolateral ridge and small cephalon sunken into pereonite 1. Pereonite 1 is deeply concave with anterolateral margins which almost extend to the tip of the cephalon. The pleotelson is broader than long and the uropods extend past the pleotelson margin (Hadfield et al. in press). This species was redescribed in detail by Hadfield et al. (in press) and has been shown to have a variable morphology depending on the sampling location of the specimen.

(6)

Kerry A. Hadfield et al. / ZooKeys 400: 1–42 (2014) 6 Ceratothoa africanae sp. n. http://zoobank.org/B4BA5F68-2070-4464-88FB-B27356761920 http://species-id.net/wiki/Ceratothoa_africanae Figs 1–7, 21

Material examined. Holotype. Female (29 mm TL; 15 mm W), collected from a

trawl (34°26'S, 24°13'E) along the south coast of South Africa from the buccal-cavity of Spondyliosoma emarginatum, 30-04-2003, coll. N.J. Smit (SAM A45937; HP 221).

Paratypes. All from the buccal-cavity of Spondyliosoma emarginatum and collected while trawling (34°26'S, 24°13'E) along the south coast of South Africa (30-04-2003), coll. N.J. Smit: Three females (22–26 mm TL; 12–15 mm W), three males (11–13 mm TL; 5–6 mm W), one dissected female (30 mm TL; 15 mm W), one dissected male (16 mm TL; 7 mm W) (SAM A45938; HP 221).

Other material. In the possession of authors at NWU. From the the buccal-cavity of Spondyliosoma emarginatum: Algoa Bay (33°51'S, 25°52'E), 1978: female (28 mm TL; 12 mm W). Eastern Cape, no date: female (20 mm TL; 11 mm W), male (7 mm TL; 3 mm W). Tsitsikamma Grootbank, Sout River (34°1'S, 23°28'E), September 1993: female (19 mm TL; 8 mm W).

Ovigerous female holotype. Length 19–29 (23.4) mm, width 8–15 (12.5) mm.

Body ovoid, 1.5 times as long as greatest width, dorsal surfaces smooth and polished in appearance, widest at pereonite 4, most narrow at pereonite 1, lateral margins poste-riorly ovate. Cephalon 0.6 times longer than wide, visible from dorsal view, triangular. Frontal margin rounded to form blunt rostrum. Eyes oval with distinct margins. Pere-onite 1 with slight indentations, anterior border straight, anterolateral angle with small distinct anterior projection which does not extend past the eyes, posterior margins of pereonites smooth and straight. Coxae 2–3 with posteroventral angles not visible; 4–7 rounded. Pereonites 1–4 increasing in length and width; 5–7 decreasing in length and width; becoming more progressively rounded posteriorly. Pleon with pleonite 1 same width as other pleonites, visible in dorsal view; pleonites posterior margin smooth, most-ly concave; posterolateral angles of pleonite 2 narrowmost-ly rounded, not posteriormost-ly pro-duced. Pleonites 3–5 similar in form to pleonite 2. Pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles free, not overlapped by lateral margins of pleonite 4, posterior margin with 2 indented points. Pleotelson 0.5 times as long as anterior width, dorsal surface smooth, lateral margins posteriorly narrow, posterior margin evenly rounded, without median point.

Antennule more stout than antenna, comprised of 7 articles; peduncle articles 1 and 2 distinct and articulated; article 2 0.9 times as long as article 1; article 3 0.3 times as long as combined lengths of articles 1 and 2, 0.7 times as long as wide; flagellum with 4 articles, extending to anterior of pereonite 1. Antenna comprised of 8 articles. Antenna peduncle article 3 1.5 times as long as article 2, as long as wide; article 4 0.8 times as long as wide, 0.8 times as long as article 3; article 5 0.5 times as long as article 4, 0.7 times as long as wide. Antenna flagellum with 3 articles, last article terminating in no setae, extending to anterior margin of pereonite 1. Anterior margin acute, with small median point. Mandibular process ending in an acute incisor, with no simple setae,

(7)

Review of the fish parasitic genus Ceratothoa Dana, 1852... 7 mandible palp article 2 and 3 without setae. Maxillule simple with 4 terminal robust setae. Maxilla mesial lobe partly fused to lateral lobe; lateral lobe without simple setae, 3 recurved robust setae; mesial lobe with 6 large recurved robust setae and no simple setae. Maxilliped covered in pectinate scales and comprised of 3 articles, with lamellar oostegite lobe, palp article 2 without simple setae, article 3 with 5 recurved robust setae. Oostegites margin covered in numerous plumose setae, attached to pereopods 2–5.

Pereopod 1 basis 1.6 times as long as greatest width; ischium 0.7 times as long as basis; merus proximal margin with bulbous protrusion; carpus with straight proximal margin; propodus 1.3 times as long as wide; dactylus slender, 1.1 as long as propodus, 2.4 times as long as basal width. Pereopod 2 propodus 1.4 as long as wide; dactylus 1.1 as long as propodus. Pereopods gradually increasing in size towards posterior and all with-out robust or simple setae. Pereopod 6 basis 1.3 times as long as greatest width, ischium 0.9 times as long as basis, propodus 1.4 as long as wide, dactylus 1.3 as long as propodus. Pereopod 7 basis 1.3 times as long as greatest width; ischium 0.7 as long as basis, without protrusions; merus proximal margin with slight bulbous protrusion, merus 0.3 as long as ischium, 0.4 times as long as wide; carpus 1.3 as long as ischium, without bulbous protrusion, 0.8 times as long as wide; propodus 0.7 as long as ischium, 1.4 times as long as wide; dactylus slender, 1.3 as long as propodus, 3 times as long as basal width.

Pleopods without setae, exopod larger than endopod. Pleopod 1 exopod as long as wide, lateral margin strongly convex, distally truncate, mesial margin weakly convex; endopod 1.2 times as long as wide, lateral margin convex, distally subtruncate, mesial margin straight; peduncle 3.3 times as wide as long, without retinaculae. Pleopods 2–5 similar to pleopod 1 and mesial margins becoming more strongly produced. Pleopods 3–5 endopods proximal borders extending below exopod to peduncle. Large medial lobes present and increasing in size from pleopod 1 to 5.

Uropod more than half the length of pleotelson, peduncle 0.7 times longer than rami, peduncle lateral margin without setae; rami not extending beyond pleotelson, marginal setae absent, apices narrowly rounded. Endopod apically slightly pointed, 3.8 times as long as greatest width, lateral margin straight, terminating without setae, mesial margin straight. Exopod not extending to end of endopod, 4.1 times as long as greatest width, apically rounded, lateral margin weakly convex, terminating with no setae, mesial margin straight.

Male. Length 7–14 (10.6) mm, width 3–7 (4.9) mm.

Males similar to females but much smaller. Body oval, 1.4 times as long as wide. Penis small, low tubercles. Pleopod 2 appendix masculina with parallel margins, 1.2 times as long as endopod, distally bluntly rounded.

Etymology. Named for FRS Africana, from which the species was collected, also

acknowledging that this is the first Ceratothoa species to be described from Africa.

Distribution. Eastern Cape Province, South Africa: from Tsitsikamma to Algoa Bay.

Hosts. Found in the buccal-cavity, on the tongue of Spondyliosoma emarginatum

(Valenciennes, 1830).

Prevalence. 9/17 (53%) of Spondyliosoma emarginatum infected from the FRS

(8)

Figure 1. Ceratothoa africanae sp. n. female holotype (29 mm) (SAM A45937): A dorsal view B

(9)

Figure 2. Ceratothoa africanae sp. n. female paratype (30 mm) (SAM A45938): A antennule B antenna C mandible D tip of maxillule E maxillule F tip of maxilliped article 3 G maxilla H tip of maxilla I

(10)

Figure 3. Ceratothoa africanae sp. n. female holotype (29 mm) (SAM A45937): A pereopod 1 B

(11)

Figure 4. Ceratothoa africanae sp. n. female paratype (30 mm) (SAM A45938): A dorsal pleopod 1 B dorsal pleopod 2 C dorsal pleopod 3 D dorsal pleopod 4 E dorsal pleopod 5 F ventral pleopod 1 G ventral pleopod 2 H ventral pleopod 3 I ventral pleopod 4 J ventral pleopod 5.

(12)

Figure 5. Ceratothoa africanae sp. n. male paratype (14 mm) (SAM A45938): A dorsal view B antero-dorsal

(13)

Figure 6. Ceratothoa africanae sp. n. male paratype (14 mm) (SAM A45938): A antennule B antenna C maxillule D mandible E maxilla F tip of maxilliped G maxilliped H uropod I pereopod 1 J pereopod 7.

(14)

Figure 7. Ceratothoa africanae sp. n. male paratype (14 mm) (SAM A45938): A dorsal pleopod 1

B dor-sal pleopod 2 C dorB dor-sal pleopod 3 D dorB dor-sal pleopod 4 E dorB dor-sal pleopod 5 F ventral pleopod 1 G ventral pleopod 2 H ventral pleopod 3 I ventral pleopod 4 J ventral pleopod 5.

(15)

Remarks. Ceratothoa africanae sp. n. can be distinguished by the stout body shape

of the female; a pointed rostrum; short and stout antennae; uropods which do not extend past the pleotelson; a broad pleon; large medial lobes on female pleopods; and an appendix masculina on the second pleopod in male specimens. This species was compared to the known species from South Africa at the time (C. imbricata, C. retusa and C. trigonocephala) and found to be distinct. Upon comparisons to other known species worldwide, it was concluded to be a new species.

Ceratothoa africanae sp. n. differs from C. retusa in having a larger cephalon not sunken into pereonite 1 as seen in C. retusa; lacks the anterolateral ridge on pereonite 1; has shorter uropods which do not extend past the posterior margin of the pleotelson; and lacks the large extended anterolateral margins on pereonite 1 which extend more than half the length of the cephalon in C. retusa but less than half in C. africanae.

Ceratothoa africanae sp. n. shares many similarities with C. imbricata and C. famosa sp. n. Ceratothoa africanae resembles C. imbricata in having pereonite 1 longer than pereonites 2–4 and both have two concave mediolateral indents on the pleonite 5 pos-terior margin, but differs in having a broader body, anterolateral angles on pereonite 1 which do not extend past the eyes as is seen in C. imbricata, shorter uropods that do not extend past the pleotelson and an acute cephalon anterior margin. The pleopods of C. africanae have a few smaller lobes and folds and the pereopod 6 and 7 merus is produced on both the anterior and posterior sides. Furthermore, C. africanae pere-onite 7 does not overlap any plepere-onites and pereopods 1 to 3 have a smaller merus, but pereopods 4 to 7 are larger. Ceratothoa africanae and C. famosa (see below) differ in the number of setae on the mandibular palp (five on C. africanae and three on C. famosa); no setae on the maxilliped palp in C. africanae sp. n. but seven setae on C. famosa; and nine setae on C. africanae maxilla but ten on C. famosa. More differences are noted in the remarks on C. famosa sp. n.

Ceratothoa famosa sp. n.

http://zoobank.org/6F47F60D-9157-446F-9A2E-8A189549F087 http://species-id.net/wiki/Ceratothoa_famosa

Figs 8–14, 21

? Meinertia imbricata.– Trilles 1972: 1248–1250, pl. II (10–11).

Material examined. Holotype. Female (23 mm TL; 10 mm W), collected from

Tsitsi-kamma National Park (34°1'S, 23°52'E) along the south coast of South Africa from the buccal-cavity of Diplodus sargus capensis, March 2005, coll. K.A. Hadfield (SAM A45939).

Paratypes. All from Tsitsikamma National Park (34°1'S, 23°52'E), Western Cape Province. From the buccal-cavity of Diplodus sargus capensis: dissected female (27 mm TL; 12 mm W), dissected male (13 mm TL; 6 mm W), April 2009, coll. K.A. Had-field (SAM A45940); female (17 mm TL; 7 mm W), males (7, 14 mm TL; 3, 6 mm W), March 2005, coll. K.A. Hadfield (SAM A45941).

(16)

From the buccal-cavity of Sparadon durbanensis: female (15 mm TL; 6 W), male (5.5 mm TL; 2 mm W), April 2009, coll. K.A. Hadfield (SAM A45942).

Other material. In the possession of authors at NWU. From Diplodus sargus capensis: Cape Agulhas (34°49'S, 20°0'E): female (18 mm TL; 7 mm W), male (9 mm TL; 3 mm W). Kenton-on-sea (33°42'S, 26°41'E): female (14 mm TL; 5 mm W), male (5 mm TL; 2 mm W), May 1974. Morgan Bay (32°42'S; 28°20'E): two females (10, 12 mm TL; 3, 4 mm W), April 2003. Swartkops River Estuary (33°52'S; 25°38'E): female (10 mm TL; 3 mm W), male (6 mm TL; 2 mm W), July 1980. Transkei, between Goss Bay and Lupatana: female (10 mm TL; 4 mm W), September 1975. Transkei, Grosvenor Point (31°22'S, 29°53'E): female (15 mm TL; 6 mm W), male (6 mm TL; 2 mm W), September 1975. Tshani (31°56'S, 29°12'E): female (10 mm TL; 3 mm W), June 1996.

From Diplodus cervinus hottentotus: Kleinemonde (33°32'S, 27°03'E): female (25 mm TL; 6 mm W), male (5 mm TL; 2 mm W), June 1975; female (15 mm TL; 6 mm W), male (6 mm TL; 2 mm W), March 1975; Keiskamma River Mouth (33°16'S, 27°29'E): female (18 mm TL; 8 mm W), male (9 mm TL; 4 mm W), February 1976; Knysna (34°5'S, 23°3'E): female (19 mm TL; 7 mm W), male (8 mm TL; 3 mm W), 1945–1969. Tsitsikamma National Park (34°1'S, 23°52'E): female (20 mm TL; 7 W), male (14 mm TL; 5 mm W), 17 juveniles, March 2007.

From Sparadon durbanensis: Cape Padrone, Eastern Cape (33°46'S, 26°28'E): four pullus (5 mm TL; 2 mm W), July 1975. Kleinemonde (33°32'S, 27°03'E): five pullus (4 mm TL; 2 mm W), February 1977. Knysna (34°5'S, 23°3'E): two pullus (5 mm TL; 2 mm W), 1945–1965. Tsitsikamma National Park (34°1'S, 23°52'E): female (26 mm TL; 12 W), male (12 mm TL; 5 mm W), 35 juveniles, July 2008.

Ovigerous female holotype. Length 10–28 (16.9) mm, width 3–12 (6.0) mm.

Body rectangular, 1.7 times as long as greatest width, dorsal surfaces smooth and polished in appearance, widest at pereonite 4 and pereonite 5, most narrow at pere-onite 7, lateral margins slightly convex. Cephalon 0.8 times longer than wide, slight-ly visible in dorsal view, triangular. Frontal margin rounded to form blunt rostrum. Eyes irregular in outline. Pereonite 1 with median projection, anterior border straight, anterolateral angle with distinct anterior projection, posterior margins of pereonites smooth and slightly curved laterally. Coxae 2–3 with posteroventral angles not vis-ible; 4–7 rounded. Pereonites 1–5 increasing in length and width; 6–7 decreasing in length and width; becoming more progressively rounded posteriorly. Pleon with pleonite 1 same width as other pleonites, visible in dorsal view; pleonites posterior margin smooth, mostly concave; posterolateral angles of pleonite 2 narrowly rounded, not posteriorly produced. Pleonites 3–5 similar in form to pleonite 2. Pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles free, not overlapped by lateral margins of pleonite 4, posterior margin with 2 indented points and medial indent. Pleotelson 0.5 times as long as ante-rior width, dorsal surface smooth, lateral margins posteante-riorly narrow, posteante-rior margin broadly truncate, without median point.

Antennule more stout than antenna, comprised of 7 articles; peduncle articles 1 and 2 distinct and articulated; article 2 0.8 times as long as article 1; article 3 0.3 times as long as combined lengths of articles 1 and 2, 0.8 times as long as wide; flagellum

(17)

Review of the fish parasitic genus Ceratothoa Dana, 1852... 17 with 4 articles, extending to anterior of pereonite 1. Antenna comprised of 9 articles. Antenna peduncle article 3 1.4 times as long as article 2, 1.1 times as long as wide; article 4 1.1 times as long as wide, 0.9 times as long as article 3; article 5 0.5 times as long as article 4, 0.8 times as long as wide. Antenna flagellum with 4 articles, last article terminating in no setae, extending to anterior margin of pereonite 1. Anterior margin rounded, forming median point. Mandibular process ending in an acute incisor, with no simple setae, mandible palp article 2 with no distolateral setae, and article 3 with 7 serrate setae. Maxillule simple with 4 terminal robust setae. Maxilla mesial lobe partly fused to lateral lobe; lateral lobe with no simple setae, 6 recurved robust setae; mesial lobe with no simple setae, and 4 large recurved robust setae. Maxilliped weakly seg-mented, with lamellar oostegite lobe, palp article 2 with no simple setae, article 3 with 3 recurved robust setae, and no simple setae. Oostegites margin covered in numerous plumose setae, attached to pereopods 2–5.

Pereopod 1 basis 1.6 times as long as greatest width; ischium 0.8 times as long as basis; merus proximal margin with bulbous protrusion; carpus with straight proximal margin; propodus 1.4 times as long as wide; dactylus slender, 1.1 as long as propodus, 2.5 times as long as basal width. Pereopod 2 propodus 1.5 as long as wide; dactylus 1.1 as long as propodus. Pereopods gradually increasing in size towards posterior and all without robust or simple setae. Pereopod 6 basis 1.6 times as long as greatest width, ischium 0.8 times as long as basis, propodus 1.5 as long as wide, dactylus 1.2 as long as propodus. Pereopod 7 basis 1.3 times as long as greatest width; ischium 0.9 as long as basis, without protrusions; merus proximal margin with slight bulbous protrusion, merus 0.3 as long as ischium, 0.5 times as long as wide; carpus 1 as long as ischium, without bulbous protrusion, 0.7 times as long as wide; propodus 2.1 as long as ischium, 1.4 times as long as wide; dactylus slender, 1.3 as long as propodus, 2.9 times as long as basal width.

Pleopods without setae, exopod larger than endopod. Pleopod 1 exopod 1.1 times as long as wide, lateral margin weakly convex, distally broadly rounded, mesial margin straight; endopod 1.4 times as long as wide, lateral margin convex, distally subtrun-cate, mesial margin straight; peduncle 3.3 times as wide as long, without retinaculae. Pleopods 2–5 similar to pleopod 1. Pleopods 3–5 endopods proximal borders do not extend below exopod to peduncle. Large medial lobes absent.

Uropod same length as pleotelson, peduncle 1 times longer than rami, peduncle lat-eral margin without setae; rami extending to pleotelson apex, marginal setae absent, api-ces narrowly rounded. Endopod apically slightly pointed, 4.1 times as long as greatest width, lateral margin straight, terminating without setae, mesial margin straight. Exo-pod extending to end of endoExo-pod, 3.3 times as long as greatest width, apically rounded, lateral margin weakly convex, terminating with no setae, mesial margin straight.

Male. Length 4–14 (8.2) mm, width 1–5 (3.3) mm.

Males similar to females but much smaller. Body rectangular, 1.6 times as long as wide. Penis small, low tubercles. Pleopod 2 appendix masculina absent.

Etymology. A photograph by one of us (NJS) of this species in the mouth of a

(18)

Figure 8. Ceratothoa famosa sp. n. female holotype (28 mm) (SAM A45939): A dorsal view B anterior

(19)

Figure 9. Ceratothoa famosa sp. n. female paratype (26 mm) (SAM A45941): A antennule B antenna C mandible D tip of maxillule E maxillule F tip of maxilla G tip of maxilliped article 3 H maxilla I

(20)

Figure 10. Ceratothoa famosa sp. n. female holotype (28 mm) (SAM A45939): A pereopod 1 B pereopod 2 C pereopod 6 D pereopod 7.

(21)

Figure 11. Ceratothoa famosa sp. n. female paratype (26 mm) (SAM A45941): A dorsal pleopod 1 B dorsal pleopod 2 C dorsal pleopod 3 D dorsal pleopod 4 E dorsal pleopod 5 F ventral pleopod 1 G ventral pleopod 2 H ventral pleopod 3 I ventral pleopod 4 J ventral pleopod 5.

(22)

Figure 12. Ceratothoa famosa sp. n. male paratype (12 mm) (SAM A45941): A dorsal view B anterior

(23)

Figure 13. Ceratothoa famosa sp. n. male paratype (12 mm) (SAM A45941): A antennule B antenna C maxillule D mandible E maxilla F maxilliped G uropod H pereopod 1 I pereopod 7.

(24)

Figure 14. Ceratothoa famosa sp. n. male paratype (12 mm) (SAM A45941): A dorsal pleopod 1 B

dor-sal pleopod 2 C dordor-sal pleopod 3 D dordor-sal pleopod 4 E dordor-sal pleopod 5 F ventral pleopod 1 G ventral pleopod 2 H ventral pleopod 3 I ventral pleopod 4 J ventral pleopod 5.

(25)

Review of the fish parasitic genus Ceratothoa Dana, 1852... 25 2004 has been used in many media reports worldwide, including magazines, children’s books, documentaries, nature programmes, daily news reports, and even in a motion picture. The epithet is derived from famosus (Latin—famous) (Brown 1956).

Distribution. Known from off the southern coast of South Africa: Cape

Agul-has; Knysna; Tsitsikamma; Swartkops River Estuary; Kenton-on-sea; Kleinemonde; Keiskamma River Mouth; Morgan Bay; Tshani; Grosvenor Point; and Transkei (be-tween Goss Bay and Lupatana).

Hosts. Found on the tongue of Diplodus sargus capensis (Smith, 1844), Diplodus

cervinus hottentotus (Smith, 1844) and Sparadon durbanensis (Castelnau, 1861).

Prevalence. 1/3 (33.3%) of Diplodus cervinus hottentotus, 6/20 (30%) of Diplodus

sargus capensis and 6/33 (18.2%) of Sparadon durbanensis infected from Tsitsikamma Na-tional Park; 26/366 (7.1%) of Diplodus cervinus hottentotus, 78/1004 (7.8%) of Diplodus sargus capensis and 11/100 (11%) of Sparadon durbanensis from the SAIAB collections.

Remarks. Ceratothoa famosa sp. n. can be distinguished by the long rectangular

body shape, pereonite 1 with a raised medial protrusion, a blunt rostrum, narrow antenna with antennule article 1 expanded, uropods which reach the posterior margin of the pleotelson, pereopods 1 and 2 with large bulbous protrusion on merus, narrow rami on uropods, and no appendix masculina on pleopod 2 of the male specimens.

Ceratothoa famosa sp. n. is similar to C. trigonocephala in having pereonites 1–4 almost subequal but has a more bluntly rounded anterior margin of the cephalon ob-served in C. imbricata as well as the two mediolateral concave indents in pleonite 5. Specific characters for C. famosa include an antennule with an enlarged first article; a medial protrusion on pereonite 1 creating a rounded elevation around the cephalon; and a rostral point which is folded over between the antennae. The anterolateral mar-gins are close to the cephalon and are bluntly rounded extending just past the mid-dle of the cephalon. The uropods are the same length as the pleotelson and the male specimens lack an appendix masculina on pleopod 2 as seen with C. oestroides (Risso, 1826), C. italica Schioedte & Meinert, 1883, C. capri (Trilles, 1964c), C. gilberti (Richardson, 1904) and C. gaudichaudii. The pleopods do not have many folds or lobes but the pereopods have large carinae and extended protrusions on the merus of pereopods 1 and 2.

Other differences between C. famosa sp. n. and C. africanae sp. n. is the rostral point, which is blunt and ventrally directed and does not fold over in C. africanae.; C. famosa pereonite 7 overlaps pleonite 1 and the P1–P4 merus has a large bulbous protrusion which is smaller in P5–P7 (opposite in C. africanae sp. n.); and C. famosa. has pointed rather than rounded anterolateral margins on pereonite 1 as seen in C. africanae.

Miers (1876) commented that South African specimens in his possession from the Cape of Good Hope did not correspond to the specimens of C. imbricata in the British Museum and that there was a probability that the specimens were a distinct species. It is probable that all the records of C. imbricata (or C. banksii Leach, 1818) from South Africa are C. famosa sp. n.

(26)

Excluded species

Two widely recorded species Ceratothoa imbricata (Fabricius, 1775) and Ceratothoa trigonocephala (Leach, 1818), both of which have long been considered to occur in South Africa (see Kensley 1978), are here excluded from the South African fauna. As there has been sustained confusion over the identity of these two species (see Miers 1884, Stebbing 1902, 1908, Nierstrasz 1915, Trilles 1973, Bruce et al. 2002), we pre-sent descriptions of the type material, and include differential remarks and brief com-ments on the distribution and host use for the species, based solely on those records we have been able to confirm. For a full synonymy and lists of all the host and locality records, see Trilles (1994) or Hadfield (2012).

Ceratothoa imbricata (Fabricius, 1775)

http://species-id.net/wiki/Ceratothoa_imbricata

Figs 15–18, 21

Oniscus umbricatus Fabricius, 1775: 296. Oniscus imbricatus.– Fabricius 1787: 241.

Cymothoa imbricata.– Fabricius 1793: 503; 1798: 304. Cymothoa Banksii Leach, 1818: 353.

Ceratothoa Banksii.– Schioedte and Meinert 1883: 340–347, tab. XIV (Cym. XXI), Figs 6–21.

Ceratothoa imbricata.– Ellis 1981: 123.

Codonophilus imbricatus.– Hale 1926: 223–226, Figs 15–16; 1927: 315; 1929: 263–264, fig. 262; 1937: 19; 1940: 303.

Cymothoa banksii.– Ellis 1981: 124.

Material examined. Holotype of Ceratothoa imbricata. The Natural History Museum,

London (BMNH 1979.403.1) – female (34 mm TL; 16 mm W) collection of Sir Joseph Banks, Linnean Society, from New Zealand, coll. S.W.J. Banks, host unknown (Fabricius 1775). Noted: there is a hole in pereonite 4 and 5.

Holotype of Ceratothoa banksii. The Natural History Museum, London (BMNH 1979.402.1) – female (37 mm TL; 18 mm W), presented by Leach to the Museum of the Linnean Society, from New Zealand, White’s MS Cat No. 222, Coll. W.E. Leach, host unknown.

Description of holotype. Body ovoid, 2.1 times as long as greatest width, dorsal

surfaces slightly bumpy, widest at pereonite 5, most narrow at pereonite 1, lateral mar-gins posteriorly ovate. Cephalon 0.7 times longer than wide, visible from dorsal view, triangular. Frontal margin rounded to form blunt rostrum. Eyes oval with distinct margins. Pereonite 1 with slight indentations, anterior border straight, anterolateral angle with distinct produced point extending to or beyond the eye margin, posterior

(27)

Review of the fish parasitic genus Ceratothoa Dana, 1852... 27 margins of pereonites smooth and slightly curved laterally. Pereonites 1–5 increasing in length and width; 6–7 decreasing in length and width; 6 and 7 narrower. Pleon with pleonite 1 most narrow, visible in dorsal view; pleonites posterior margin smooth, mostly concave; posterolateral angles of pleonite 2 narrowly rounded, not posteriorly produced. Pleonites 3–5 similar in form to pleonite 2. Pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles free, not overlapped by lateral margins of pleonite 4, posterior margin produced medially. Pleotelson 2 times as long as anterior width, dorsal surface with lateral in-dent, lateral margins weakly convex, posterior margin rounded, without median point. Antennule more stout than antenna, comprised of 8 articles. Antenna comprised of 4 articles. Pereopod 1 basis 1.5 times as long as greatest width; ischium 0.8 times as long as basis; merus proximal margin with bulbous protrusion; carpus with straight proximal margin; propodus 1.5 times as long as wide; dactylus slender, 0.9 as long as propodus, 2.3 times as long as basal width. Pereopod 2 propodus 1.3 as long as wide; dactylus 0.6 as long as propodus. Pereopods 3 similar to pereopod 2. Pereopod 6 basis 1.4 times as long as greatest width, ischium 0.7 times as long as basis, propodus 1.5 as long as wide, dactylus 1 as long as propodus. Pereopod 7 basis 1.2 times as long as greatest width; ischium 0.7 as long as basis, without protrusions; merus proximal mar-gin with slight bulbous protrusion, merus 0.4 as long as ischium, 0.6 times as long as wide; carpus 0.6 as long as ischium, without bulbous protrusion, 0.5 times as long as wide; propodus 0.6 as long as ischium, 1.4 times as long as wide; dactylus slender, 1.1 as long as propodus, 2.5 times as long as basal width. Uropod longer than the pleotel-son, peduncle 0.7 times longer than rami, peduncle lateral margin without setae; rami extending beyond pleotelson, marginal setae absent, apices narrowly rounded.

Distribution. Australia (Schioedte and Meinert 1883, Miers 1884, Hale 1927, 1940),

New Zealand (Fabricius 1775, 1793) and Indonesia (Schioedte and Meinert 1883). Yu and Li (2003) included a figure of a specimen described as C. imbricata from Chinese waters; the figures show that the antenna bases do not touch, which excludes the species from Ceratothoa.

Hosts. From the mouth of a salmon–trout; from a Monacanthus sp. (Miers 1884);

in the Australian jack mackerel, Trachurus declivis (Hale 1926, 1929); in snapper Chrysophrys auratus (previously Pagrosomus auratus), red gurnard (Chelidonichthys kumu), and mullet (Mugil sp.) (Hale 1926, 1929); in mouth of Girella tricuspidata (Hale 1926, 1929); trevally Psuedocaranx dentex (previously Caranx georgianus) (Hale 1926, 1929).

Schioedte and Meinert (1883) mention a fish they thought may be a “red hotten-tot (Sargi hottenhotten-totti Sm. ??)” collected from the Cape of Good Hope in South Africa. This could refer to the red roman fish, Chrysoblephus laticeps (see Kensley 1978), the Zebra (Diplodus cervinus hottentotus) or the Hottentot (Pachymetopon blochii) as “Sargi hottentotti” is not a valid taxonomic name and cannot be found in current fish database searches. No fresh material or museum material of these specimens from the red roman or those collected by Kensley (1978) could be found so these records are not accepted.

(28)

Figure 15. Ceratothoa imbricata (Fabricius, 1775), female holotype (34 mm) (BMNH 1979.403.1): A dorsal view B antero-dorsal view of pereonite 1 and cephalon C dorsal view of pleotelson D lateral view.

(29)

Figure 16. Ceratothoa imbricata (Fabricius, 1775), female holotype (34 mm) (BMNH 1979.403.1): A pereopod 1 B pereopod 2 C pereopod 6 D pereopod 7.

(30)

Figure 17. Ceratothoa imbricata (Fabricius, 1775), female (37 mm), (BMNH 1979.402.1 originally

designated as holotype of Ceratothoa banksii Leach, 1818): A dorsal view B antero-dorsal view of pereonite 1 and cephalon C ventral view of cephalon D dorsal view of pleotelson E lateral view.

(31)

Figure 18. Ceratothoa imbricata (Fabricius, 1775), female (37 mm), (BMNH 1979.402.1 originally

designated as holotype of Ceratothoa banksii Leach, 1818): A pereopod 1 B pereopod 2 C pereopod 6

(32)

Remarks. Ceratothoa imbricata can be identified by a large pereonite 1 with

ante-rolateral margins extending past the eyes; uropods as long or longer than the pleotelson margin; merus with bulbous protrusion; a blunt rostrum; and body widest at pereonite 5.

It is apparent that over the years there have been many misidentifications of C. imbricata, C. banksii and C. trigonocephala, with these names being widely misapplied. The description of C. banksii from New Zealand, given by Miers (1876) can also be applied to the small Australian C. imbricata specimens of Miers (1884), with only some slight variations in eyes, smaller anterolateral extensions on pereonite, 1 and a slightly arched pleotelson posterior margin. The original description of C. banksii by Leach (1818) also described the pleotelson as “nearly straight” but according to Miers (1884), desiccation had caused the specimen to roll slightly. Many authors agreed with the synonymy of Ceratothoa banksii with C. imbricata including Stebbing (1893), Nierstrasz (1915) and Trilles (1973) and we maintain this synonymy, however this needs further investigation, especially when fresh material becomes available.

Trilles (1994) placed Hale’s (1926, 1927, 1929, 1940) records of C. imbricata into synonymy with C. trigonocephala. After reviewing Hale’s (1926) figures, we conclude that his original identification of C. imbricata is correct.

No South African specimens were found, fresh or from museum collections, that could be identified as C. imbricata, and the species is here excluded from the South Africa fauna.

Ceratothoa trigonocephala (Leach, 1818)

http://species-id.net/wiki/Ceratothoa_trigonocephala

Figs 19–21

Cymothoa trigonocephala Leach, 1818: 353; Guérin-Méneville and Cuvier 1829–1843: 26, pl. 29, fig. 2; Milne Edwards 1840: 272–273; Ellis 1981: 124.

Ceratothoa trigonocephala.– Schioedte and Meinert 1883: 358–364, tab. XVI (Cym. XXIII) Figs 1–7.

Material examined. Lectotype [here designated]: The Natural History Museum,

Lon-don (NHMUK 2013.1013) – female specimen (42 mm TL) collected by W.E. Leach, White’s MS Cat no. 404 a, b, host and locality unknown. Also noted: the female drawn was very squashed and missing pereonite 1.

Paralectotype. The Natural History Museum, London (BMNH 1979.404.2) – fe-male specimen (17 mm TL without cephalon) collected by W.E. Leach, White’s MS Cat no. 404 a, b, host and locality unknown. Also noted: damaged female, missing the cephalon and oostegites, with dissected uropods.

Description of lectotype. Body margins sub-parallel, 2.4 times as long as greatest

width, dorsal surfaces smooth and polished in appearance, widest at pereonite 5 and pereonite 6, most narrow at pereonite 1, lateral margins subparallel. Cephalon 0.6 times longer than wide, visible from dorsal view, triangular. Frontal margin rounded

(33)

Review of the fish parasitic genus Ceratothoa Dana, 1852... 33 to form blunt rostrum. Eyes not visible. Pereonite 1 with slight indentations, anterior border slightly indented, anterolateral angle with distinct anterior projection, posterior margins of pereonites smooth and straight. Pereonites 1–5 increasing in length and width; 6–7 decreasing in length and width; 6 and 7 narrower. Pleon with pleonite 1 most narrow, visible in dorsal view; pleonites posterior margin smooth, mostly con-cave; posterolateral angles of pleonite 2 rounded, not posteriorly produced. Pleonites 3–5 similar in form to pleonite 2. Pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles free, not over-lapped by lateral margins of pleonite 4, posterior margin produced medially. Pleotel-son 0.5 times as long as anterior width, dorsal surface with lateral indent, lateral mar-gins weakly convex, posterior margin sub-truncate, without median point. Antennule more stout than antenna, comprised of 7 articles. Antenna comprised of 7 articles. Pereopod 1 basis 1.4 times as long as greatest width; ischium 0.8 times as long as basis; merus proximal margin without bulbous protrusion; carpus with rounded proximal margin; propodus 1.4 times as long as wide; dactylus slender, 1.2 as long as propodus, 2.3 times as long as basal width. Pereopod 2 propodus 1.4 as long as wide; dactylus 1.1 as long as propodus. Pereopods 3 similar to pereopod 2. Pereopod 6 basis 1.5 times as long as greatest width, ischium 0.8 times as long as basis, propodus 1.5 as long as wide, dactylus 1.1 as long as propodus. Pereopod 7 basis 1.4 times as long as greatest width; ischium 0.8 as long as basis, without protrusions; merus proximal margin with slight bulbous protrusion, merus 0.4 as long as ischium, 0.7 times as long as wide; carpus 0.3 as long as ischium, without bulbous protrusion, 0.7 times as long as wide; propodus 0.6 as long as ischium, 1.6 times as long as wide; dactylus slender, 1.2 as long as propo-dus, 2.5 times as long as basal width. Uropod more than half the length of pleotelson, peduncle 0.7 times longer than rami, peduncle lateral margin without setae; rami not extending beyond pleotelson, marginal setae absent, apices narrowly rounded.

Distribution. Predominately the Indo-Pacific region: Australia; Vanuatu; and

In-donesia (Schioedte and Meinert 1883), but given the uncertainty over the identity of these records the distribution remains entirely uncertain.

Hosts. There are currently no confirmed hosts for this species.

Remarks. Ceratothoa trigonocephala has a triangular cephalon, for which it is

named, and arched carinae on the last pair of pereopods. It is identified by the sub-equal pereonites 1–4; mid-dorsal protrusion on pereonite 1; short and bluntly rounded anterolateral margins of pereonite 1; and uropods which do not extend past the pleo-telson posterior margin. The type locality and host for C. trigonocephala were not men-tioned in the original work by Leach (1818).

Previously, Filhol (1885) noted that C. trigonocephala, C. huttoni Filhol, 1885 and C. novaezelandiae Filhol, 1885 were three separate species based on small morphologi-cal differences. Some of these differences included the shape of the antennae; the shape and dimensions of the pereonites; and pigmentation. All three of these species were later combined into one as C. trigonocephala, with the differences recognised as intraspecific and not interspecific (Trilles 1972). After reviewing the drawings, C. huttoni was found to not resemble the C. trigonocephala holotype and the identity of C. novaezelandiae could not be confirmed and thus these synonymies are not upheld here.

(34)

Figure 19. Ceratothoa trigonocephala (Leach, 1818), female lectotype (42 mm) (NHMUK 2013.1013): A dorsal view B antero-dorsal view of pereonite 1 and cephalon C dorsal view of pleotelson D lateral view.

(35)

Figure 20. Ceratothoa trigonocephala (Leach, 1818), female lectotype (42 mm) (NHMUK 2013.1013): A pereopod 1 B pereopod 2 C pereopod 6 D pereopod 7.

(36)

Figure 21. Photographs of the Ceratothoa specimens studied: A lateral view of C. africanae sp. n. (SAM

A45938) B dorsal view of C. africanae sp. n. (SAM A45938) C lateral view of C. famosa sp. n. (SAM A45941) D dorsal view of C. famosa sp. n. (SAM A45941) E dorsal view of C. imbricata (Fabricius, 1775) (BMNH 1979.403.1) F dorsal view of C. trigonocephala (Leach, 1818) (NHMUK 2013.1013).

Ceratothoa trigonocephala has often been confused with C. imbricata and a complete redescription and species clarification on these two species was needed. Differences be-tween C. imbricata and C. trigonocephala, based on description of the type specimens in-clude: Ceratothoa imbricata pereonite 1 is larger than pereonites 2–4 while in C. trigono-cephala these four pereonites are subequal; the posterior margin of pereonite 1 is curved in C. imbricata and straight in C. trigonocephala; C. imbricata had a bulbous protrusion on the merus of pereopod 1 which is absent in C. trigonocephala; and the uropods of C. trigonocephala are shorter than the pleotelson but are longer in C. imbricata. Further-more, C. imbricata has a more narrow and produced anterolateral angles on pereonite 1; a more rounded anterior margin on the cephalon; longer uropods which extend to or past the posterior margin of the pleotelson; and pereonite 1 is longer than pereonites 2–4 which are almost subequal in C. trigonocephala.

Although this species had been recorded from South Africa (Kensley 1978, 2001), no South African specimens were found during the present study that could be identi-fied as C. trigonocephala, and the species is here excluded from the South Africa fauna.

(37)

Conclusion

We regard Ceratothoa imbricata and C. trigonocephala as valid and distinct species de-spite the historical confusion over their respective identities. When comparing the holotype of C. banksii to C. imbricata, a number of similarities and differences could be seen but without other new material these differences seemed insufficient to remove the synonymy at present.

Records of C. imbricata and C. trigonocephala without figures or mention of mu-seum material are impossible to verify. The synonymy presented here includes only those records that we can confirm against our redescription of the type material.

Although valid species, C. imbricata and C. trigonocephala do not occur in South Africa. These misidentifications were most probably referring to one of the two new species, C. africanae sp. n. or C. famosa sp. n.

Acknowledgements

The financial assistance of the National Research Foundation (NRF) towards this re-search is hereby acknowledged (project IFR2011040100022). Opinions expressed and conclusions arrived at, are those of the authors and are not necessarily to be attributed to the NRF. We thank the Captain and crew of the FRS Africana and Dr Sharon du Plessis (MCM Chief Scientist) for the opportunity to collect material during the April/ May 2003 South Coast Hake Biomass Survey. Special thanks to the South African In-stitute for Aquatic Biodiversity (SAIAB) for allowing us to sample their fish collection and obtain valuable data on these isopods. Further thanks to Liz Hoenson from the Iziko South African Museum, Cape Town (SAM) and Miranda Lowe from the Natural History Museum, UK (NHMUK) for loan of the museum material used. NLB thanks the Museum of Tropical Queensland for permission to travel for this body of work.

References

Adlard RD, Lester RJG (1994) Dynamics of the interaction between the parasitic isopod, Ani-locra pomacentri, and the coral reef fish, Chromis nitida. Parasitology 109: 311–324. doi: 10.1017/S0031182000078343

Anonymous (1999) International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (Fourth Edition). International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, London, 306 pp.

Barnard KH (1925) Contributions to the crustacean fauna of South Africa. No 9. Further ad-ditions to the list of Isopoda. Annals of the South African Museum 20: 381–412. Barnard KH (1940) Contributions to the crustacean fauna of South Africa. 12. Further

addi-tions to the Tanaidacea, Isopoda, and Amphipoda, together with keys for the identifica-tion of the hitherto recorded marine and freshwater species. Annals of the South African Museum 32: 381–543.

(38)

Bianconi G (1869) Specimina zoologica Mosambicana, Fasciculus XVII. Memorie dell’Acca-demia delle Scienze dell’Istituto di Bologna 9: 199–222.

Bleeker P (1857) Recherches sur les Crustacés de L’Inde Archipelagique. II. Sur les Isopodes Cymothoadiens de L’Archipel Indien. Natuurkundige vereeniging in Nederlandsche-In-die, Batavia, Verhandelingen, 2: 20–40.

Bowman TE (1978) Nomenclatural problems in the cymothoid isopod genera Ceratothoa, Codonophilus, Glossobius and Meinertia – their solution by applying the law of priority. Crustaceana 34: 217–219. doi: 10.1163/156854078X00754

Bragoni R, Romestand B, Trilles J-P (1984) Parasitoses à cymothoadien chez le loup (Dicen-trarchus labrax Linnaeus, 1758) en élevage. I. Écophysiologie parasitaire dans le Cas de l’Étang de Diana (Haute-Corse) (Isopoda, Cymothoidae). Crustaceana 47: 44–51. doi: 10.1163/156854084X00306

Brandt A, Poore GCB (2003) Higher classification of the flabelliferan and related Isopoda based on a reappraisal of relationships. Invertebrate Systematics 17: 893–923. doi: 10.1071/ IS02032

Brown RW (1956) Composition of Scientific Words. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C., 863 pp.

Bruce NL, Bowman TE (1989) Species of the parasitic isopod genera Ceratothoa and Glossobius (Crustacea: Cymothoidae) from the mouths of flying fishes and halfbeaks (Beloniformes). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 489: 1–28.

Bruce NL, Ton HML, Poore GCB (2002) Cymothoidae Leach, 1814. In: Poore GCB (Ed) Crustacea: Malacostraca: Syncarida, Peracarida: Isopoda, Tanaidacea, Mictacea, Thermos-baenacea, Spelaeofriphacea. Zoological Catalogue of Australia, Volume 19.2A, CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne, 434 pp.

Brusca RC (1981) A monograph on the Isopoda Cymothoidae (Crustacea) of the eastern Pacific. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 73: 117–199. doi: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.1981.tb01592.x

Coleman CO, Lowry JK, Macfarlane T (2010) DELTA for beginners. An introduction into the taxonomy software package DELTA. ZooKeys 45: 1–75. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.45.263 Dana JD (1852) On the classification of the Crustacea Choristopoda or Tetradecapoda.

Ameri-can Journal of Sciences and Arts 2: 297–316.

Dana JD (1853) Crustacea. Part II. United States Exploring Expedition during the years 1838, 1839, 1840, 1841, 1842, under the command of Charles Wilkes, USN. C. Sherman, Philadelphia, 696–805.

Ellis JP (1981) Some type specimens of Isopoda (Flabellifera) in the British Museum (Natural History), and the isopods in the Linnaean Collection. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History) 40: 121–128.

Fabricius JC (1775) Systema Entomologiae, sistens Insectorum Classes, Ordines, Genera, Species, adiectis Synonymis, Locis, Descriptionibus, Observationibus. Officina Libraria Kortii, Flens-burgi & Lipsiae, 832 pp. doi: 10.5962/bhl.title.36510

Fabricius JC (1787) Mantissa Insectorum sistens eorum species nuper detectas adiectis charac-teribus genericus, differentiis specificis, emendationibus, observationibus. Christ. Gottl. Proft., Hafniae, 348 pp. doi: 10.5962/bhl.title.36471

(39)

Fabricius JC (1793) Entomologia Systematica emendata et acuta, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species adjectis synonimis, locis, observationibus, descriptionibus. Christ. Gottl. Proft., Hafniae, 519 pp.

Filhol H (1885) Mission de Isle Campbell. Recherches zoologiques, botaniques, et géologiques faites a l’Isle Campbell et en Nouvelle-Zélande. Recueil de Mémoires, Rapports et Do-cuments relatifs a l’observation du passage de Vénus sur le soleil du 9 Décembre, 1874. Libraire des Compte rendus de séances de l’Académie des Sciences, Paris, 1–182, pl. 135. Froese R, Pauly D (Eds) (2013) FishBase. World Wide Web electronic publication, version

(09/2009). http://www.fishbase.org [accessed May 2013]

Guérin-Méneville FÉ, Cuvier G (1829–1843) Iconographie du règne animal de G. Cuvier; ou, Représentation dáprès nature de lúne des espèces les plus remarquables, et souvent non encore figurées, de chaque genre dánimaux. Avec un texte descriptif mis au courant de la science. Ou-vrage pouvant servir d’atlas à tous les traités de zoologie. Crustaces. J. B. Baillière, Paris, 48 pp. Hadfield KA (2012) The biodiversity and systematics of marine fish parasitic isopods of the family

Cymothoidae from southern Africa. PhD thesis, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa, 445 pp.

Hadfield KA, Bruce NL, Smit NJ (2010) Redescription of the monotypic genus Cinusa Schi-oedte and Meinert, 1884 (Isopoda, Cymothoidae), a buccal-cavity isopod from South Af-rica. Zootaxa 2437: 51–68.

Hadfield KA, Bruce NL, Smit NJ (2011) Cymothoa hermani sp. n. (Isopoda, Cymothoidae, Crustacea), a parasitic isopod, collected off the Zanzibar coast, Tanzania from the mouth of a parrotfish (Scaridae). Zootaxa 2876: 57–68.

Hadfield KA, Bruce NL, Smit NJ (2013) Review of the fish-parasitic genus Cymothoa Fab-ricius, 1783 (Isopoda, Cymothoidae, Crustacea) from the south-western Indian Ocean, including a new species from South Africa. Zootaxa 3640: 152–176. doi: 10.11646/ zootaxa.3640.2.2

Hadfield KA, Bruce NL, SzinetárC, Smit NJ (in press) Ceratothoa retusa (Schiœdte & Meinert, 1883) (Isopoda, Cymothoidae), a variable species of fish parasitic marine isopod from the Indian Ocean. Crustaceana.

Hale HM (1926) Review of Australian isopods of the cymothoid group. Part II. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia 50: 201–234, pls. 226, 227.

Hale HM (1927) The fauna of Kangaroo Island, South Australia. 1. The Crustacea. Transactions and proceedings of the Royal Society of South Australia 51: 307–321.

Hale HM (1929) The Crustaceans of South Australia. Part II. Weir, Government Printer, Adelaide, 202–380.

Hale HM (1937) Isopoda and Tanaidacea. Australasian Antarctic Expedition 1911–14 Under the leadership of Sir Douglas Mawson, OBE, BE, DSc, FRS Scientific Reports, Series C– Zoology and Botany 2: 1–45.

Hale HM (1940) Report on the cymothoid Isopoda obtained by the F.I.S. “Endeavour” on the coasts of Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, and South Australia. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia 64: 288–304.

Haswell WA (1881) On some new Australian marine Isopoda. Part I. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales 5(4): 470–481.

(40)

Haswell WA (1882) Catalogue of the Australian stalk- and sessile-eyed Crustacea. The Australian Museum, Sydney, 1–324. doi: 10.5962/bhl.title.1948

Hilgendorf F (1879) Die von Herrn. W. Peters in Moçambique gesammelten Crustaceen. Monatsbericht de Königlich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, (Physi-kalisch-mathematischen Klasse) 1878: 782–851.

Horton T (2000) Ceratothoa steindachneri (Isopoda: Cymothoidae) new to British waters with a key to north-east Atlantic and Mediterranean Ceratothoa. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 80: 1041–1052. doi: 10.1017/S0025315400003106 Horton T, Okamura B (2001) Cymothoid isopod parasites in aquaculture: a review and case

study of a Turkish sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax) and sea bream (Sparus auratus) farm. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 46: 181–187. doi: 10.3354/dao046181

Jones CM, Miller TL, Grutter AS, Cribb TH (2008) Natatory-stage cymothoid isopods: de-scription, molecular identification and evolution of attachment. International Journal for Parasitology 38: 477–491. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpara.2007.07.013

Kensley B (1978) Guide to the Marine Isopods of Southern Africa. South African Museum & The Rustica Press, Wynberg, Cape Town, 173 pp.

Kensley B (2001) Biogeography of the marine Isopoda of the Indian Ocean, with a check-list of species and records. In: Kensley B, Brusca RC (Eds) Isopod Systematics and Evolution Crustacean Issues 13. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, 205–264.

Kensley B, Schotte M (1989) Guide to the Marine Isopod Crustaceans of the Caribbean. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. & London, 308 pp.

Ketmaier V, Joyce DA, Horton T, Mariani S (2008) A molecular phylogenetic framework for the evolution of parasitic strategies in cymothoid isopods (Crustacea). Journal of Zoologi-cal Systematics and Evolutionary Research 46: 19–23.

Kussakin OG (1979) Marine and brackishwater likefooted Crustacea (Isopoda) from the cold and temperate waters of the Northern Hemisphere. Suborder Flabellifera. Izdatel’stvo Nauka, Leningrad [In Russian], 472 pp.

Leach WE (1814) Crustaceology. In: Brewster D (Ed) The Edinburgh Encyclopaedia. Baldwin, London, 383–437, pl. 221.

Leach WE (1818) Cymothoadées. In: Cuvier F (Ed) Dictionnaire des Sciences Naturelles. Strasbourg et Levrault, Paris, 338–354.

Martin MB, Bruce NL, Nowak BF (2013) Redescription of Ceratothoa carinata (Bianconi, 1869) and Ceratothoa oxyrrhynchaena Koelbel, 1878 (Crustacea: Isopoda: Cymothoidae), buccal-attaching fish parasites new to Australia. Zootaxa 3683: 395-410.

Menzies RJ (1962) The zoogeography, ecology, and systematics of the Chilean marine iso-pods. Reports of the Lund University Chile Expedition 1948–49. 42. Lunds Universitets Årsskrifte, N.F. Avd. 2, 57(11): 1–162.

Miers EJ (1876) Catalogue of the stalk and sessile-eyed Crustacea of New Zealand. Colonial Mu-seum and Geological Department of New Zealand, National History Publication 10: 1–133. Miers EJ (1884) Crustacea. Report on the zoological collections made in the Indo-Pacific

Ocean during the voyage of HMS “Alert”, 1881–1882. BMNH, London, 299–311. Milne Edwards H (1840) Histoire Naturelle des Crustacés Comprenent l’anatomie, la physiologie

(41)

Mladineo I (2002) Prevalance of Ceratothoa oestroides (Risso, 1826), a cymothoid isopode para-site, in cultured sea bass Dicentrarchus labrax L. on two farms in middle Adriatic Sea. Acta Adriatica 43: 97–102.

Nierstrasz HF (1915) Die Isopoden-Sammlung im Naturhistorischen Reichsmuseum zu Leiden – 1. Cymothoidae. Zoologische Mededelingen (Leiden) 1: 71–108, pls. 103, 104.

Nierstrasz HF (1931) Isopoda genuina. II. Flabellifera. In: Weber M, De Beaufort LF (Eds) Die Isopoden der Siboga-Expedition. E.J. Brill, Leiden, 123–233, pls. 110, 111.

Otto AW (1828) Beschreibung einiger neuen, in den Jahren 1818 und 1819, im Mittell-ländischen Meere gefundener Crustaceen. Nova Acta Academiae Caesareae Leopoldino Carolinae 14: 331–354.

Ravi V, Rajkumar M (2007) Effect of isopod parasite, Cymothoa indica on gobiid fish, Oxyu-richthys microlepis from Parangipettai coastal waters (South-east coast of India). Journal of Environmental Biology (India) 28: 251–256.

Richardson H (1904) Contributions to the natural history of the Isopoda. Proceedings of the United States National Museum 27: 1–89. doi: 10.5479/si.00963801.27-1369.657 Richardson H (1905) A monograph on the isopods of North America. Bulletin of the United

States National Museum 54: vii–liii, 1–727.

Richardson H (1910) Marine isopods collected in the Philippines by the U.S. Fisheries steamer Albatross in 1907–08. Bureau of Fisheries Document 736: 1–44.

Pillai NK (1954) A preliminary note on the Tanaidacea and Isopoda of Travancore. Bulletin of the Central Research Institute, University of Kerala, India 3: 1–21.

Romestand B (1979) Etude ecophysiologique des parasitoses a cymothoadiens. Annales de Parasitologie Humaine et Comparee 54: 423–448, pls.1–4.

Schioedte JC, Meinert F (1883) Symbolæ ad monographium Cymothoarum crustaceorum familiæ. III. Saophridæ. IV. Ceratothoinæ. Naturhistorisk Tidsskrift, Kjøbenhavn 13: 281–378, pls. 211–286.

Schioedte JC, Meinert F (1884) Symbolæ ad monographium cymothoarum crustaceorum iso-podum familiæ. IV. Cymothoidæ Trib. II. Cymothoinæ. Trib. III: Lironecinæ. Naturhis-torisk Tidsskrift, Kjøbenhavn 14: 221–454, pls. 226–213.

Schultz GA (1969) How to know the marine isopod crustaceans. Wm. C. Brown, Iowa, 359 pp. Stebbing TRR (1893) A History of Crustacea. Recent Malacostraca. Kegan Paul, Trench,

Trubner & Co. Ltd., London, xvii, 466 pp.

Stebbing TRR (1900) On Crustacea brought by Dr Willey from the South Seas. In: Willey A (Ed) Zoological results based on material from New Britiain, New Guinea, Loyalty Islands and elsewhere, collected during the years 1895, 1896 and 1897. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 605–690.

Stebbing TRR (1902) South African Crustacea. Part 2. Marine Investigations in South Africa 2: 1–92.

Stebbing TRR (1908) General catalogue of South African Crustacea. (Part V. of S.A. Crustacea, for the Marine Investigations in South Africa). Annals of the South African Museum 6: 281–594.

Stebbing TRR (1910a) Isopoda from the Indian Ocean and British East Africa. The Percy Sladen Trust Expedition to the Indian Ocean under the leadership of Mr J. Stanley